Adhoc temporary promotions explicitly denying seniority benefits do not confer retrospective seniority upon regularisation through competitive exam; seniority reckoned from regular appointment date only.

ORDER 

Justice K. Haripal, Judicial Member

Applicants had started as Junior Engineers in 2000 in the Postal Civil Wing of the Engineering Branch. On the basis of the decision of the DPC held on 06.07.2009 they along with some other Junior Engineers were promoted as Assistant Engineers with effect from 08.07.2009 on adhoc basis, for a period of 11 months. According to the applicants, their adhoc appointment continued uninterrupted and atlast they were promoted as regular Assistant Engineers on 02.06.2020. The precise claim of the applicants is that they are working as Assistant Engineers from 08.07.2009 un- interuptedly and continously without any break, for more than 10 years till they were regularized on 02.06.2020, therefore they are entitled to be regularized and seniority reckoned from 08.07.2009, the date of their initial appointment as Assistant Engineer on temporary basis. In this connection they have also placed reliance on AnnexuresA12 and A13 orders of the Delhi High Court and the Principal Bench of this Tribunal respectively. The draft seniority list published 26.02.202, Annexure A-10, does not contain their names. Even though they made repeated representations for regularizing them and reckoning their seniority in the cadre of Assistant Engineer from 08.07.2009, that were not considered and that prompted them to approach this Tribunal seeking a direction to the respondents to consider their representation for regular promotion from 08.07.2009 and to direct the respondents to revise the draft seniority list published by the respondents on 26.02.2020 vide Annexure A-10.

2. As our learned counter parts in Bangalore had recused from hearing the matter, the OA was made over to us on the orders of the Hon'ble Chairman of the Central Administrative Tribunal. We heard the case in virtual mode.

3. During the pendency of the Original Application, the party respondents 6 to 9 sought to intervene and got themselves impleaded and contested the case. The official respondents and the party respondents have opposed the claim of the applicants.

4. The respondents 1 to 5 in their common reply have disputed the contentions. According to them the applicants were considered for appointment as Assistant Engineers in the quota of Limited Departmental Competitive Examination (LDCE), which is 50% of the sanctioned posts. When the examination was about to be held on 03.05.2010 and 04.05.2010, an association of the applicants- Bhartiya Postal Civil Wing Non-Gazetted Employees Union through its Circle Secretary moved the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court and obtained an interim order. The High Court was told by them that Recruitment Rules have not been framed by the DoT for Group B posts, in the absence of rules, promotional posts should not be filled up through the impugned examination. On that basis, an interim order was passed on 30.04.2010- Annexure R-1 produced by the official respondents; thus the Court permitted the respondents to hold the examination, but the result was directed to be kept in abeyance. Such an order continued till it was vacated on 18.04.2017 by Annexure R-5 order. When the result was declared, it was found that no-one had qualified in the LDCE. But some of the applicants along with others challenged that decision before this Tribunal and the Tribunal by Annexure R-2 order interefered with the finding that no-one had qualified and directed to re-draw the list. Accordingly, fresh list was publishe